1. Protecting the Commons: Results from the Community Land Protection Program Baseline (CLPP) Alexandra Hartman 1, Heather Huntington 2, Rachael Knight 3 1 Yale University; 2 Cloudburst Consulting Group; 3 Namati

2. The need to protect community land Research shows that common property institutions can be the most efficient way to manage communal natural resources (e.g. Ostrom, 2007) … Investors and governments seeking lands and natural resources put pressure on community institutions... Legal norms privilege valid written records weakening unwritten community-based tenure

3. The impact of protecting community land and natural resources If communal land rights are strengthened and formally documented under national law, can they provide the foundation for inclusive, democratic governance, increased transparency, stronger land rights for women and minorities, improved land and natural resource management, and greater economic productivity?

4. The Namati and the Sustainable Development Institute’s Community Land Protection Program Laying the groundwork: Legal empowerment and capacity building; Land documentation: Land mapping, conflict resolution, boundary harmonization; Good governance: Transformation of unwritten community rules for land and natural resources management into written by-laws and the election of a diverse governing body; Setting communities for a strong future: Preparing communities to protect their land rights when interfacing with government actors and potential investors.

5. Liberia West African nation of 4.3 million people Dual property rights system since first “settlers” arrived in early 19th century Civil war from 1989-2003 Communities in rural areas use customary institutions with individual and community-based property rights 2013 Land Rights Policy creates opportunity for increased protection of community land and resources

6. Research design 91 community clusters receive program in either phase one or phase two Baseline quantitative and qualitative data prior to and following each phase of program implementation: –Household survey, leaders survey, and high frequency data –Key informant interviews and focus groups Ongoing monitoring and evaluation Ongoing monitoring and evaluation

7. Baseline data validate assumptions about protecting community land Communities use and manage land/resources through both individual and community-based systems Current land or natural resource tenure can be strengthened through documentation Communities have inequitable governance structures Communities do not have documented land rules, norms and processes agreed to by the whole community Women, minorities and other groups are not included in community- level decision-making process

8. Community infrastructure No communities have access to the electrical grid Only 36% of communities have cellphone service Less than 30% of communities have paved roads or secondary schools

9. Land and resource governance 58% of community members stated that the first settlers/landlord or the community elders were the most important authorities in land and natural resource governance 40% of community members state that they community have some rules for land and natural resource management 35% of community members stated that women are disadvantaged by the existing rules 31% of community members stated that minorities are disadvantaged by the existing rules

10. Land and resource tenure security 92% of community members plan to leave their fields fallow next year 48% of community members stated there was a possibility that neighbors encroach within the community 22% of community members stated there was a possibility that elites could encroach on community land 53% of community members stated that it was a possibility that other communities could encroach on community land 29% of community members stated that it was a possibility that investors could encroach on community land

11. Women community member’s participation 34% of women (compared with 58% of men) are aware of land and resource governance meetings 56% of women (compared with 83% of men) participate in land and resource governance meetings (when they are aware) 19% of women (compared with 57% of men) participate in monitoring land and resource rules

12. Conclusion